Injury Time Out - Good or Bad for Tennis?

Personally I feel unless a Player has suffered a serious injury during a Match, allowing them to halt play because they're feeling dizzy, stomach sick, knee problem, cramping or any other aliment that Players use to stop the flow of the Game is getting out of control.

These are Athletes who train for these moments and for them to stop the progression of a match which seemingly is always those who are behind, seems to be used as an advantage or strategy when they need a break. The current rules allow it but is it time for this rule to be revised?

Coach

The only acceptable loss is when your opponent was better than you on that given day.
It is never acceptable to lose when your opponent was not.

Problem

Originally Posted by Coach

Personally I feel unless a Player has suffered a serious injury during a Match, allowing them to halt play because they're feeling dizzy, stomach sick, knee problem, cramping or any other aliment that Players use to stop the flow of the Game is getting out of control.

These are Athletes who train for these moments and for them to stop the progression of a match which seemingly is always those who are behind, seems to be used as an advantage or strategy when they need a break. The current rules allow it but is it time for this rule to be revised?

Coach

The PROBLEM would come when they would be forced to play or default.
If they continued to play and it resulted in their wellbeing suffering i think you would see claims for compensation being lodged. I think that playing the time outs is now just another thing they are coached to do.
I remember NADAL early on used to use this a LOT!!
Its not something i like but, it,s here to stay

The PROBLEM would come when they would be forced to play or default.
If they continued to play and it resulted in their wellbeing suffering i think you would see claims for compensation being lodged. I think that playing the time outs is now just another thing they are coached to do.
I remember NADAL early on used to use this a LOT!!
Its not something i like but, it,s here to stay

It can be as simple as, you can either play or default. As for compensation, who would be responsible if a player is not fit enough to finish a match? Its not like contact sports.

Let's face it, Tennis Players can be Elitist at times. They run no more than your average Football Player or Soccer Player, they have no body to body contact, generally they are not diving for balls, even if they get hit by the ball the most they will suffer is a little sting for a few moments. And yet, I've never seen such a group of babies like some of these Players. You train, practice and play all year to get the opportunity to play in the Main Draw of a Grand Slam and you default because you have stomach ache

I recall a match at the USO where Pete Sampras was actually throwing up on the side of the Court. He wiped his face and continued to play and beat Alex Corretja. The Australian Open is played in Phoenix Ariz. type heat and yet most fight through it. If you're not capable of dealing with various conditions, then maybe you need to assess whether this is a Sport for you.

When you decide to become a Tennis Player, you know going in that you are going to be putting certain joints of your body in jeopardy like your knees, shoulders and back. Either you decide to deal with that or you don't but to use the injury time out when you're down in a Match more than often looks very much like a ploy to gain an advantage.

Maybe the Umpire needs to allow 60 sec. and invoke point penalties. If you are facing losing points and possibly a game or even a Set and you're not really injured, then you'll get your butt back out there.

The only acceptable loss is when your opponent was better than you on that given day.
It is never acceptable to lose when your opponent was not.

Personally I feel unless a Player has suffered a serious injury during a Match, allowing them to halt play because they're feeling dizzy, stomach sick, knee problem, cramping or any other aliment that Players use to stop the flow of the Game is getting out of control.

These are Athletes who train for these moments and for them to stop the progression of a match which seemingly is always those who are behind, seems to be used as an advantage or strategy when they need a break. The current rules allow it but is it time for this rule to be revised?

Coach

they are allowed to stop the match to use the restroom too, right? are there any other ways? as long as an individual doesn't show a pattern, i believe it should remain in effect.

Benifit of the player

It can be as simple as, you can either play or default. As for compensation, who would be responsible if a player is not fit enough to finish a match? Its not like contact sports.

Let's face it, Tennis Players can be Elitist at times. They run no more than your average Football Player or Soccer Player, they have no body to body contact, generally they are not diving for balls, even if they get hit by the ball the most they will suffer is a little sting for a few moments. And yet, I've never seen such a group of babies like some of these Players. You train, practice and play all year to get the opportunity to play in the Main Draw of a Grand Slam and you default because you have stomach ache

I recall a match at the USO where Pete Sampras was actually throwing up on the side of the Court. He wiped his face and continued to play and beat Alex Corretja. The Australian Open is played in Phoenix Ariz. type heat and yet most fight through it. If you're not capable of dealing with various conditions, then maybe you need to assess whether this is a Sport for you.

When you decide to become a Tennis Player, you know going in that you are going to be putting certain joints of your body in jeopardy like your knees, shoulders and back. Either you decide to deal with that or you don't but to use the injury time out when you're down in a Match more than often looks very much like a ploy to gain an advantage.

Maybe the Umpire needs to allow 60 sec. and invoke point penalties. If you are facing losing points and possibly a game or even a Set and you're not really injured, then you'll get your butt back out there.

These rules were established for the benifit of the players and, like most rights are going to be used by the few against the many.
Coach, i rember you saying that playing in The AUSTRALIAN OPEN was no good for the game because of the defaults and heat problems.
When you ask who would they sue? If a player was not allowed a injury time out and, was forced to play or default and played resulting in collapse the drama would be huge. Who would they sue? The tournament? The umpires?
The event organizers? Anyone who refused them an injury time out that resulted in harm. Also i think if it was a popular player the public would also scream. TWO more canidates for lawsuits ATP ( JIMMY CONNORS DID THAT ALREADY IF I REMBER RIGHT) WTA

I think (and I may be wrong) that players sometimes withdraw or retire simply because they don't want a disadvantage on them when they play. They may still be able to play and will likely lose, but they don't want to go out that way so they decide to retire. I personally, unless I literally can't move or feel that continuing to play will cause a serious injury, I will keep playing.

Agree

Originally Posted by renatog

I think (and I may be wrong) that players sometimes withdraw or retire simply because they don't want a disadvantage on them when they play. They may still be able to play and will likely lose, but they don't want to go out that way so they decide to retire. I personally, unless I literally can't move or feel that continuing to play will cause a serious injury, I will keep playing.

I agree but, i think a lot of players are coached from very young by parents then coaches to use anything they can to gain advantage.
I belive last year ROBERT LANSDORPH (Sharapovas former coach) was complaining that cheating in juniors was runing American tennis.
This is just grown up cheating !!